Category: Running a Business for Fun and Profit

The principle behind “outsourcing” is simple: “if there is a benefit to having somebody else do something, why should I do it myself?” For example, let’s say you have a friend whose birthday is coming up and you happen to know that your friend likes chocolate cake. You could bake a cake from scratch using a recipe like one of these, but you may not have the time or the necessary skills; you could make a cake from a mix, which is a lot cheaper and a lot easier, but even though it is less of a time commitment it may still take more free time than you have. Or you could pick up a pre-made, beautifully frosted cake from the bakery department of your local grocery store. It might cost more than a box of cake mix (probably on a par with the cost of making from scratch), but you know it’s been done right (even if it isn’t quite as mouthwateringly delicious as a well-prepared homemade cake), and it’s almost instant from your standpoint.

Clearly, I am applying the term “outsourcing” in a very broad fashion that is appropriate for home, office, and large organizations. You may have noticed that the decision to do something “in house” or to “outsource” depends on many factors, including cost, time available, and ability to complete the task. Unfortunately, too few people and organizations faced with this decision ask themselves the other version of my simple question: “Wait, what exactly is the benefit of having somebody else do this?”

Many people make decisions only using one of the factors we have laid out: I don’t know anything about electrical wiring so I’d better hire an electrician instead of tearing into things myself; I don’t have time to cook dinner so I have to get take-out; I don’t have enough money to buy a pre-made cake at Albertsons, so I’d better get that cake mix. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, sometimes it is merely a necessary thing. Trust me, when the breaker has popped is the wrong time to learn about household wiring.

These decisions change according to scale, too. If you owned, say, a duplex, it’s probably best to hire an electrician and be done with it. But if on the other hand you own a 100 unit apartment complex, you almost certainly will save money putting a handyman on staff, who can not only do basic electrical work, but also basic plumbing, carpentry, repairs, tile work, HVAC, appliance troubleshooting, and the like. Not only that, you will probably save time not having to find, make appointments with, and pay the various contractors our theoretical handyman replaces.

But why stop there? Lets say that apartment complex sits on about 6 acres of land. Why 6 acres? Because I happen to know from experience that one can have all the landscaping on 6 acres done on a weekly basis — including seasonal color and maintenance of the sprinkler system — for about $1800 per month. I double checked that figure with an industry insider this morning. That size is big enough that it might not be cost effective to have your handyman mowing lawns; there are too many other things he could be doing on a property that size. This is known as opportunity cost, and it’s the same type of decision we made above regarding the birthday cake, namely that time and money we spend one place can’t be spent another place. But how many 6 acre apartment communities do we have to arrange landscaping on before it becomes cost effective to lease a truck, buy some garden tools, and hire another guy to mow those lawns? Remember, you’ll be hiring a “pro” who will almost certainly do a better job than your handyman could, even if he did have the time. Does it stop being merely “cost effective” and become “profitable” if we hire out his excess capacity mowing other lawns? Now we are starting — just barely — to touch upon economies of scale, the idea that if we do enough of one thing, the cost of each unit of that one thing may go down.

So now we have demonstrated that there are sometimes benefits to outsourcing, and sometimes benefits do doing things in house. For example, GM outsources a lot of work not related to building cars, yet they still own a large chunk of their finance arm, GMAC, and furthermore some of their outsourcing adventures such as their Delphi subsidiary are not doing so well. Delphi in particular is a reminder to ask what benefit we get from outsourcing; the idea that an “independent” company could do the same work with the same workers and the same equipment for less money seems like a prescription for disaster.

Strangely enough, this brings me to today’s news. The International Herald Times tells us that the recent problem with Thomas the Tank Engine toys that may be giving kids lead poisoning is a tale of “hubris” and “the realities of offshoring….” Although many sources will be eager to correct me that offshoring is not the same as outsourcing, they still work on the same principal: goods are made (or certain services rendered) by people who do not work for the parent company, normally at a substantially reduced cost (because it still costs money to ship things around the world), freeing up the parent company to focus on things like “core competencies.” The only difference is what country the workers are in. Issues of worker’s rights, safety conditions, local laws, international trade, the cost in money and fuel of transporting finished goods, foreign standards of living, environmental issues of foreign nations, and the like are important in the grand scheme of things, but a footnote to our current conversation.

The thing that we as consumers must remember about such outsourcing, the IHT tells us, is that it allows American companies to charge top dollar for cheaply made imported goods that might be bad for us while making oversized profits and claiming to know nothing about what happens behind the doors of their manufacturer. It’s clear how that benefits certain companies, but it sure doesn’t benefit us. And that’s without even mentioning American workers.

Nor are American corporations alone in outsourcing; the Federal Government does it too. That article points out that “There are now more people doing federal jobs under corporate contracts than there are people employed directly by the government.” They’ve outsourced all kinds of things under the publicly stated principle that “private industry can always do it better than government” while ignoring the principle that “for-profit corporations are in business to make a profit.” The idea that private industry is always better also ignores the potential economy of scale issues involved in something being done by an entity as massive as a national government. Of course the privately help principles at work sure seem to involve helping buddies make a buck. And just like our situation with Chinese made poison toys, the buck just keeps getting passed around, because everybody claims ignorance and nobody is responsible, except just maybe some low-level, expendable grunt. Sound familiar?

While Mr. Hightower’s article focuses on issues such as military support, the college loan program, the proposed privatization of Social Security and the like, the fact is that some people would also like to outsource, or “privatize” schools (through charter schools and vouchers) and even national parks, which were specifically made national parks because they were too important to be in the hands of individuals.

Clearly this is a time to start asking — and keep asking — that question: “Wait, what exactly is the benefit of having somebody else do this?”

In closing: a wall runs through campus, the proposed border fence (which most people see as a waste of time and money) will actually be well on the American side of the border, splitting a community, wreaking environmental havoc, and creating passport issues for students and other citizens — but remember, an obscure provision of Real ID says they can build their wall without respect to any other darn laws, and no court has any jurisdiction to stop them; murder may be a sin, but more importantly it’s a crime punishable by life in prison; the GAO Subcommittee on the Obvious reports that government agencies ignore the laws that President Bush signs while saying they don’t apply; when you don’t think about zebras you spend a lot of time figuring out why certain horses have stripes, or “Refugee illnesses often misdiagnosed in U.S.”; the Left doesn’t like Hillary, but check out the rest of the story here and here; if the economy is so darn great how come Best Buy is complaining about consumers tightening spending and a poll says the economy is getting worse; an item on a film called No Child Left Unrecruited; something for Archeology buffs, Lost Kingdom of the Upper Upper Upper Nile; and maybe not new, but still cool, thanks to Brian for pointing out some of the world’s smallest computers.

I grew up in apartments. This has almost certainly colored my view of housing in general. By way of contrast, I have found myself explaining apartment life to schoolkids who were reading Judy Blume’s Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing. The kids were all house-dwellers who had no frame of reference for living in an apartment, let alone living in a big apartment building with an elevator in a crowded urban area like Manhattan.

I first became aware of a psychological condition I call “house fever” when I was about 10. This condition is characterized by an intense desire to own a house regardless of whether market conditions or personal finances make it a good idea to purchase one. Sufferers will offer all kinds of reasons for their obsession, including “it’a a place of my own,” “I can have a dog,” “the kids need a yard” (this one struck me as very silly, as the apartment complex had a big playground and a big pool and lots of other kids to play with; why on earth would I want a little yard?), “nobody can tell me what to do with it,” “it’s a great investment,” “it’s a big tax break” (if it’s such a great investment why do you need the big tax break?), and so on.

I was in my late teens when I discovered that there are some things biased against apartment dwellers. This went over and above the disdain some house-dwellers had for “apartment people.” For example, the city ran a recycling program, but only for households who were served by the residential garbage service. A more egregious example was shot down in Dallas almost 2 decades ago: a proposal was made that in order to get tax revenues from those who worked in the city and lived in the suburbs (never mind the sales tax such people paid on their lunch), they could have a city income tax, with an exemption for anybody who could prove they paid municipal property tax. Now think about that. Junior has to pay income taxes on his job at McDonalds because the house is in Dad’s name? Or worse yet, a man in Chicago owns an apartment property in Dallas; for tax purposes, he lives in Dallas and the people who actually live on property don’t!

I was in my late 20s when I realized that over the course of a 30 year mortgage, Joe and Jane Average pay double the list price of the house when interest rates are much over 5.5%. If you have a copy of Excel, you can use their templates to prove it to yourself.

I was in my 30s when I found out that the Small Business Adminstration is nothing more than a facilitator of second mortgages. Renters need not apply. Contrary to popular belief, this is even true for women and minority businesspeople. Although it is well documented that there are differences in home ownership among various groups, I will leave to the reader’s imagination what that does to business ownership.

As a result I was not surprised to read that as much as 40% of the funds designated to help Manhattan small busineses recover from 9/11 went to large corporations. Actual “small” businesses often don’t have the assets to secure a loan, outside the family home. And as Judy Blume accidentally pointed out, many Manhattanites live in apartments.

Nor was I particularly surprised to read that “Renewal Money for New Orleans Bypasses Renters.” In New Orleans, however, the problem is worse. Much rental property was damaged and most rehab funds are going to homeowners in a town where about half the population rented their housing. As a result, rents have skyrocketed, pricing out a large percentage of the former population — if you may recall 28% of New Orleans population was living below the poverty line. This page contains statistics both on poverty and home ownership in New Orleans and Louisiana in general. And “State officials acknowledged that renters were not their first priority.” Well I don’t know where they think janitors, fry-cooks, mailroom clerks, jazz musicians, and the rest of the 53% of the population of New Orleans who are not homeowners are going to live.

In closing, it turns out that cheap illegal labor does not keep prices low, low, low, so we won’t have a huge wave of inflation if we make employers follow the law; Fox intends to capitalize on the Christian community by making a dozen cheap religious films a year based on best-selling Christian novels (they will probably be collosal money-makers but What Would Jesus Think?); the Washington Post reports “Some Officials Say Voting Law Changes And New Technology Will Cause Trouble” and that’s before finding out that you can open a Diebold voting machine with a hotel’s mini-bar key; and finally why go overseas to find terrorists when we can create own very own home-grown terrorists in American prisons.

I missed it.

I first discussed workplace violence over two years ago, and in many ways nothing has changed. File under “sad but true.”

The latest incident was probably big news locally when it happened, but you wouldn’t know it now. In fact, I would have overlooked it completely if it hadn’t been for a commentary on it called “Death at the Supermarket.”

Now, I am not ready to blame workplace violence on the Reagan Administration. But I am willing to say that workplace violence is a big problem, and employers need to think very carefully about whether their actions and policies might be incubating a shootout. There are things every company can do to minimize their risks, and as the nice folks at Stratfor point out, physical security is only part of the puzzle.

For starters, and I can’t say this enough, screen applicants! How indepth you need to go entirely depends on your business, but there’s a lot you can learn about somebody just from following up on their resume. Call former employers; most will only verify information you already posess, but if the resume is wrong you will catch it, and you might be lucky enough to find someone who will talk. Call references — yes yes they will say Joe Average is a swell guy, but how they say it might be surprisingly insightful. Speaking of “how they say it,” pay attention to exactly what your applicant says on the phone and at his/her interview. Be careful of filtering with things you want to hear. For pity sake I don’t care how desperately you need warm bodies, if the applicant gives you the creeps, you don’t have to hire. It’s a whole lot better to not hire someone than to fire someone on every conceivable level.

After you hire people, you are responsible for the atmosphere they work in. The Alternet article makes crystal clear that when you tolerate abuse, hazing, and ridicule in your workplace, you are asking for trouble. Oh, and school administrators, are you paying attention? This means you, too. Schools are workplaces too, in their own way. And most of the “workers” have the judgement of children. Boys will be boys? Sure, until the day somebody has had enough.

Being a bad boss can put you and your company at risk. Remember that the next time you interact with employees. We may all laugh at how Lumbergh treats employees, but it’s no laughing matter when real employees light the place on fire.

But even if you are in charge of hiring, even if you are supervisory personnel, you may or may not have any control over corporate culture. What you can do and stay within “the rules” are often limited. Corporate policies that force families apart, and 3-letter types who raise their own pay while asking rank and file to take wage, benefit, and pension cuts don’t make for happy, productive employees.

Just because they aren’t shooting up the place doesn’t mean their attitude isn’t hurting business. Try treating employees like human beings.

In closing, worried about RFID passports?; follow up on the housing market; it must be real nice to get 5 weeks paid vacation, especially when your desk is still covered in unfinished work; judge swings both gavel and cluebat, declaring that a mis-matched name is not reason enough to consider someone a fraudulent voter; what investigators were told and what the tapes show about military response on September 11 are not quite the same; a new false sense of security card, but this one is virtual and (supposedly) just for kids!; and finally “But still Pharoah’s head remained hard.” Amen, brother Toles.

You think it costs big money to fuel up a full-sized SUV? Imagine what it costs to fill the tanks on an airplane!

If you have the occasion to look at the back cover of Forbes’s Investment Guide Special issue, you will notice a full-page ad for Dassault Falcon, a manufacturer of small jet aircraft. The ad features rusting antique gas pumps and the all-capitals tagline “GET 20-60% MORE MPG AND LEAVE THE COMPETITION BEHIND.”

Yeah, that’s right. Luxury jets being promoted on the basis of fuel efficiency. Things are tough all over, eh?

It will be interesting to see how this same issue plays out between the world’s two largest makers of commercial jet aircraft, Boeing and Airbus.

Spring is in the air, and apparently it is causing the internet to funnel a variety of stories on health insurance directly to me. By way of disclaimer, I have within the last few months been responsible for the purchasing of health insurance for our company. If you want to read more about healthcare and insurance considerations thereof, I strongly recommend bookmarking HealthyConcerns.

It began with this Associated Press article. A few minutes later I read this Reuters version of the same story. The bottom line is that more than one of every four moderate income Americans went without health insurance for at least part of last year. Not poor people, people with decent, living wage jobs. This morning, the nice folks at MoveOn.org sent me a note about how their ads on healthcare were working. You can watch the ads here. By the time an hour had passed, I’d seen this article from MSNBC about gambling on whether we really need health insurance, a couple of press releases stating that businesses are having a hard time getting affordable health insurance even though an overwhelming majority of voters want affordable health insurance, MarketWatch’s take on the over 40% of middle income Americans went without insurance story, and why the Massachusetts plan won’t work everywhere — assuming you beleive it will work in Massachusetts. And just for balance, we have doctors who have decided health insurance is not worth taking.

The system under which we pay for healthcare is seriously and utterly broken. And because that payment system is broken, real people are having a hard time getting healthcare, and a hard time paying the bills for their healthcare. Furthermore, this broken payment system costs so much money that it is adversely effecting job creation, automobile prices, bankruptcy rates, and almost certainly a half dozen other things which will ripple through our neighborhoods and our economy. It critically impacts our ability to respond to emergency situations such as natural disasters, terrorist attacks, or epidemics, let alone any theoretical future pandemic.

If FEMA is too broken to fix, what exactly is our excuse for letting the health insurance system remain as it is?

Lest I be accused of being yet another Democrat with no ideas, you can see my short list of proposals in the extended entry.

In Closing: Follow-up on Wolfowitz at the World Bank; the L. A. Times on Why Gas Prices Won’t Go Down; Wired on the impact of blogging on the English language; “Hey officer, nice shot!” My how times have changed! When I was in school I think I knew one kid with a legitimate reason to have a pager, let alone a cell phone! Of course we weren’t doing an hour long commute on the subway either. NYC parents upset that schools are enforcing the rules on cell phones. And finally, a war within Feminism rages: be sure to read the article she is ripping on, linked in the first paragraph. If I may summarize: Point A, “Oh come on, Feminism aside, use some common sense and stay out of dangerous situations! Just because you’re liberated doesn’t mean you’re invincible!” Point B, “Isn’t that a gussied up version of ‘she was askin fer it’? A crime was still committed, and not by the victim.” Common sense aside, don’t all of us have the right to go someplace without being assaulted? Don’t get me wrong, everyone needs to exercise care when out and about, but being someplace shouldn’t be an excuse to commit a crime against anybody.
Continue reading Unhealthy.

Last week I wasn’t really able to post. I was busy. Specifically, I was busy doing a job I have already hired 2 people to do. This week, I will also spend a lot of time at what should be somebody else’s desk doing what should be somebody else’s job. If you think I find this frustrating, you are correct!

So please allow me, as an employer who has personally created jobs this year, to give you a few handy tips on remaining employed:

Show up! I’m not one of those people who subscribes to the theory that some percent of life is showing up. Rather, showing up is a pre-resquisite. You can’t do a job you aren’t there to do. The job wouldn’t exist if it didn’t need to be done. So show up. Be on time. Don’t cut out early. Reasonable bosses understand that sometimes things like sickness and emergencies and accidents happen. Reasonable bosses also have a finite amount of patience. This is particularly true in small offices where one person represents a double-digit percentage of the workforce.

Just do it! Your job, that is. Another non-shocker. Your number one priority at work — well, after safety — is getting the job done. For each task, Do it once; Do it right. If there’s something you can’t do, figure out why not and what to do about it.

Do what needs to be done. Want to never get a promotion again? Or want to be the first person laid off? Just use these magic words: “That’s not my job.” If the boss asks you to do something, do it. This is of course assuming that you are able to do it and that it’s legal. If a co-worker needs your help, there’s nothing wrong with lending a hand within limits of your time and ability. I am not saying to do his/her job; be reasonable. By extension, you can get a reputation as a go-getter by seeing something that needs to be done and just handling it. You might want to toss in “Oh, by the way, I took care of the XYZ.” Credit where it’s due, you know.

Be willing to solve problems. It’s okay to have problems, but it’s better to fix them. I can’t solve problems I don’t know about, so it’s important to share; however, I always prefer to hear “This is an issue” followed by “and this is what we can do about it.”

Adjust your attitude. I don’t expect boot-kissing, but I won’t tolerate a ‘tude either. There’s no such thing as job security, not even among professional types. Very, very few people have anything approaching “tenure” these days. Chances are you are not one of them.

I hope you find this helpful. Now, I must get back to work until such time as I can find someone else to staff this position.

In closing: A horrifying view of how we are turning poor children into zombies while claiming to educate them. Do we really need a standardized college curriculum? One Thousand Million Dollars missing from Iraq’s defense ministry, that would sure buy a lot of ammo. For that matter that would sure go a long time towards infrastructure. How we’ll all end up paying for Katrina. A follow-up on local disaster planning. And finally, FBI seeks recruits for Porn Squad, since we all know boobs are more dangerous than bombs in the wrong hands.

Today the ShortWoman is proud to present the final installment of her series on the sorry state of personal computing. If you haven’t read Parts I, II, and III yet, just scroll down.

Buying a New Computer Sucks

So here I am, the proud owner of a 3 year old notebook computer. I have certain frustrations with it, and certain frustrations with the software it runs. It is probably time to consider replacing it with something new, but that opens a big kettle of fish that makes the whole place stink.

I have already decided I prefer having a notebook computer. I like being able to take it places. I am willing to accept its limitations.

That means the next big choice is “What operating system do I want to use?” I’ve been a Mac user for over a decade. Although there are certainly reasons to switch to Macs, mostly I use a Mac now because I’ve been using them for a long time. Working on a Mac is easy, primarily because I already know what I am doing. Migrating to a new Mac is about as easy as it gets. So why am I not at the Apple Store trying to decide which PowerBook suits me?

First of all, the PowerBook line has not been upgraded — not so much as a speed boost — since January. iBooks got upgraded last month, but are still relatively speed and feature poor. The fastest thing available is a 1.67 GHz G4. Even iMacs are starting at a 1.8 GHz G5, higher clock speed on a fundamentally faster processor, and that is supposed to be an entry level machine. The fastest PowerBooks are looking like minimum system requirements. It has become clear that a PowerBook update will not be forthcoming until the much ballyhooed Intel Macs arrive. Nobody knows much about these machines and how compatible they are with current software. Theoretically everything should work, but theoretically we were supposed to have G5 PowerBooks by now.

Since the MacTel machines are allegedly “fast,” it seems like a no-brainer to wait for them. But wait, it turns out that the MacTel machines will include some built in Digital Rights Management that may very well limit what users can do with their machines and data they create. This could be a big deal. The official reason for this chip is to prevent piracy of the operating system. After all, there are millions of Intel based PCs out there and Apple understandably does not want rampant downloading of the new operating system and the resultant loss of hardware sales. Besides, part of the reason “plug and play” works as promised on Macintoshes is that Apple very closely controls the hardware specification. Unfortunately, OS X for Intel has already been cracked.

The final thing that makes me wonder if it might not be time to consider a non-Macintosh is the so-called “Apple Tax.” Last Sunday’s CompUSA circular sums up the matter nicely. On one page the following notebook computers are available: an Averatec 1 Ghz Celeron M for $900; an HP Pavillion Athlon 64 3200+ for $850; a Toshiba Pentium M Centrino 1.6 GHZ for $1100; and a PowerBook 1.67 GHZ G4 for $2300. Across the page is an HP 17″ P4 for $1650. Even a nicely equipped Sony Vaio can be had for hundreds less than a comparable PowerBook. Visit any major computer manufacturer’s website and build a notebook with comparable specs to the PowerBook, or compare products at any computer discounter/retailer site; all the Windows machines are substantially less.

Windows has it’s own problems, however. The new version is coming out towards then end of next year, and since upgrading an operating system is a pain in the butt which often results in bizarre incompatibilities you never thought of, it might be a good idea to wait. Since a group announced today that they will try to block Vista’s release, it may take longer than expected. And that assumes no additional problems, viruses, or grumbling over it’s “Mac feel.”

One good thing about Windows is that there is an incredible array of software available. I no longer have to worry about cross platform compatibility because I have the dominant platform. No more Mac Ghetto, no more features that I can’t have because I have the wrong operating system. But once you get beyond the dozen or so standard applications, there is actually too much choice. There’s a lot of Windows software out there, multiple products for just about any niche you can think of. Who has the time to sort out what is best for each of the dozens of things you might need to do on your computer? Who has the money to buy and throw away suboptimal solutions?

And then, it is well known that Windows is more susceptible to a variety of malware including viruses, trojans, worms, and spyware. Some infected computers turn into Zombies under the control of nefarious crackers. As much as 80% of the spam you receive may be sent by infected computers. So, as the saying goes, we’re all in this together.

Of course, I also have the option of buying a Windows computer and immediately installing Linux. Leaving aside the question of which distribution, Linux gives me a lot of options and a lot of software being developed all the time, much of it free! It’s hard not to like free. However, Linux is not as easy to use as the other major operating systems. A Linux user must be prepared to delve into the world of command lines. It is sufficiently complicated that Amazon currently offers over 2100 books on Linux.

I’d like to think I’m clever enough to learn sufficient Linux for everyday use, but there is another problem that is not so easily overcome. Linux has even bigger cross platform compatibility issues than the Macintosh. A switch to Linux means no Intuit Quicken, no Adobe Photohop or Illustrator, no Microsoft Office, and no Microsoft Internet Explorer (which you may recall is required for many sites). The solutions to these problems are kludgy at best. Although there are packages which allow Linux users to read and create standard Office files, I am forced to wonder how compatible it really is. After all, the Macintosh version of Office — actually written by Microsoft — is only about 97% compatible.

Getting enough information to make an informed choice can be tough. The fact that Apple only has a dozen models of notebook computers simplifies matters, but things get very sticky in the Windows world. Between the number of manufacturers, the number of models they have, and the brevity of the product cycle, hundreds of things are available at any time. Once you dig into the product specifications, things get even worse. Picking a processor used to be as simple as “how much MHz can I afford”; now there are multiple manufacturers, each offering multiple architectures, multiple chipsets, and seemingly endless variety. This may seem like an unimportant thing that you only need to worry about if you are designing and building computers, but the fact is that many things depend on such minutia, especially if you are considering the Linux route.

Once you have sorted out what is actually in the box, there is the fun of figuring out what it actually costs. Does the listed price reflect rebates, sales, coupons, shipping? Nobody wants a nasty surprise at the register. I would love for states to pass a law saying that the out-the-door price printed in a sales circular must be at least as large as the “after rebates” price.

This, of course, assumes you have already made some decisions about where to buy your new computer. Your local retail computer store does have the advantage of instant gratification: you see it; you buy it; you take it home and play. But such stores cost more. They have a store to light and staff and keep clean. They also have less selection, since there is no way they can carry all of the myriad products available. The local retailer also has The Salesman. This chap may have helpful advice for you, he may also have a vested interest in steering you towards a specific product you don’t need. He may be highly knowledgeable, and he may only know what is on the short list of bullet-point specs, and that he may have wrong.

If you don’t mind waiting and like to get exactly what you want, you can usually buy top line computers directly from the manufacturer. You tell HP/Compaq or Dell or whoever exactly what you want and give them a credit card number. You can usually do this online in your underwear. A few days later, the exact computer you want shows up at your house. Pretty sweet, don’t you think?

Ah, but if you are trying to save money, there is the world of online mail order. You can find some great bargains, but only if you understand exactly what you are ordering. Selection will often be good, although you will not have as many options as ordering from the manufacturer. Many of the available machines will be overstocks, discontinued items, and that sort of thing. It’s like buying at a car dealer’s “end of season blowout;” they are still good, new-in-box computers with warranties, but they are the previous model. Sometimes the difference is nothing more than a particular chip that has been upgraded. Other available items might be “returns,” “floor units,” or “white elephants.” The specifications and warranties — if any! — should be highly scrutinized. The lions share of these are good solid computers, but you need to be aware that there may be problems. Needless to say, be sure you are comfortable with the vendor’s reputation and the shipping charges.

Buying a computer is a frustrating experience. The results will effect what you are able to get done for the next several years, at which point you will be at square one all over again.

Briefly, in closing…

The Homeland Security Secretary says “What’s the problem with giving us all your personal information? We’re just trying to keep you safe!” Meanwhile, I have no idea how giving the TSA a name, date of birth, and address would have stopped this Oklahoma man from trying to take a bomb on an airplane this morning, or what that does for the security of air cargo. For that matter, has anybody given a thought to the thousands of trucks carrying explosives?

Google has become so large a brand that it has turned into a common verb. They are now a publicly traded company with an $81 thousand million market capitalization (number of shares total times price at which they sell). Here we are in the year 2005. Surely any internet company that has survived to this day has learned from the mistakes of the heady internet bubble days. Right?

Wrong.

Google does not appear to have learned a darn thing from the failed and floundering businesses that preceded it. Nor do they appear interested in the lesson. After all, they are Google and their corporate motto is “Don’t be evil.” Let’s look at some of the foolishness.

They tried to take Wall Street’s money without playing by Wall Street’s rules. Perhaps you remember that, when Google went public, they auctioned the shares. This was an attempt to get the highest price possible; if there was to be a big first day pop, they wanted the money to go into their own pockets, not the broker’s pockets. In the end, they had to settle for a little less money up front. The shares have risen quite a way since then. Google thought they had a way to prevent Wall Street from making a killing on their shares the way they had on such companies as TheGlobe.com. The truth is that shares do not trade without Wall Street.

They tried to publicly release information about their business without actually saying anything. The earnings statement filed with the SEC was sufficiently complicated that it was the next day before CNBC’s Joe Kernen felt comfortable he had an accurate earnings per share number to announce. Playing the cards close to your chest is one thing when you are privately held. It is another thing altogether when you are publicly traded. This is part of the reason Google traded down on the news. The other part is that when you announce that your profits quadrupled over the previous quarter, it’s really hard to continue that trend.

And I haven’t even gotten to today’s stupidity. Parts of the online community have been up in arms over the last sentence of this article. I’ll start there.

They are capriciously withholding information from certain news outlets. Why? It seems that last week, C|net Googled the Google CEO and published the results. They were demonstrating that search engines are a powerful tool for finding information about people as well as companies. Since I was employed as a research analyst during the internet boom, I know this only too well. There are two problems with Google’s reaction to the article. First, it’s childish. “You did something I don’t like so I’m not talking to you” was a strategy most of us left behind in High School if not before. It’s just not something you do in the business world. Even if the policy is to not say anything to certain people, you don’t make that policy public. The second problem is legal in nature. SEC Regulation FD (Fair Disclosure) says that publicly traded companies cannot “selectively disclose” information. The regulation was designed to prevent management from giving insider information to selected analysts and not telling the public. If Google chooses to not let C|net in on information disseminated to other news sources they may be in big trouble.

Focusing on this one line, however, masks a potentially serious ongoing labor issue. Google has stepped up hiring lately, adding to the job creation numbers (what a shame that nationwide 100,000 people a month are still getting laid off). Google has some unusual fringe benefits according to C|net: “Tasty victuals–free breakfast, lunch and dinner–are only one of the many perks the company offers its burgeoning number of employees. Others include a staff doctor, dry cleaning pickup and delivery, onsite car wash and oil change, gym, personal trainers, tuition reimbursement, proximity parking for pregnant employees and nursing rooms for mothers.”

At some point, they are going to have to give up the dotcom era luxuries. It is one thing to have an executive dining room, or even a company cafeteria. It is quite another to commit to serving every employee ” Ahi Tuna & Avocado Poke, Calypso Rice Salad, Roasted Pork Loin and Hazelnut Shortcakes with Plum Compote” three times a day. There will come a quarter when, to please stockholders, they will have to cut such extravagance in order to focus on the bottom line.

When that day comes, they will have a few thousand unhappy geeks on payroll.

This one goes all the people who don’t count as unemployed, the many more who are underemployed, and the millions more discouraged workers across the nation who don’t count as unemployed because they have given up on finding a job at all. May it also help those who are officially counted as unemployed.

Have you ever wondered why when you send a monster stack of resumes, you might only get a few replies? And why if you talk to company recruiters on the phone you then don’t necessarily get called in to interview? I’d like to give you a few warning flags that make a prospective employer put your resume on the bottom of the stack.

I barely know you.

Don’t follow instructions. If the ad says to send a resume with cover letter, send a resume with cover letter. Without a cover letter, your prospective boss does not necessarily know what job you are applying for. Even if all the letter says is that there is a resume, you are applying for X job, you can be reached by Y means, and are looking forward to interviewing, write it and send it! If it says fax, fax it. If it says e-mail, e-mail it. If they want it sent in the regular mail, do it. Never ever hand write your cover letter unless the ad specifically wants a hand-written cover letter — and then ask yourself why they want it hand-written.

Carpet Bomb the Universe with your Resume Back in the old days, sending a resume meant spending most of a dollar by the time you added the cost of a printed resume, a cover letter, an envelope, and a stamp. This made you really think twice about whether you stood any chance at all of getting that job, particularly when you have no job and income. Faxes and e-mail makes sending a resume virtually free. As a result, people have the tendency to send resumes for positions wildly above and wildly below their capabilities. Resist this temptation. The odds of the HR manager looking at your resume and saying both “This person isn’t qualified to be Information Technology Director!” and “But it looks like they would be great for that opening as a Computer Technician” is very low. By the same token, do not send a resume for a job that you won’t take if it is offered to you.

Don’t bother checking the grammar and spelling in your resume. Everbyody mkaes tupos own adn thn. I mean, Everybody makes typos now and then. However, a resume is a document that is supposed to sell you to a company. It has to be right. Anyone who looks at this document will be thinking about how it demonstrates your command of English and your attention to detail — in short, your ability to do the job well. If you happen to hit one of the hiring manager’s grammatical pet peeves, you can just forget getting an interview. In case you are curious, mine is s versus ‘s. Be sure to run that cover letter through the spell checker, too.

Go ahead and put your wildest dream job in the “objectives” blank of your resume template. Objectives are a great place for a candidate to shoot him/herself down. Why should I hire you if your goal is to go back to school across the country? Unless your job search focus is very narrow, it is very difficult to write an “objectives” statement that will mesh with even half the positions to which you may send your resume for consideration. Just delete that paragraph. Microsoft did you no favor by putting it in the template.

Don’t leave a way to contact you. Right now, double check that your current phone number and e-mail address is on your resume. It is not Human Resources’ job to track down your contact number. And remember to check your answering machine and e-mail regularly. Which brings me to the next point….

Don’t bother to return messages. You sent a resume. They called! They want to talk to you! But they just missed you. They aren’t calling again; it is your job to call them.

The Phone Interview

Treat it as no big deal. Even if the phone interview is nothing more than setting up a time for a sit-down interview, remember that your phone skills and ways of speaking are being noted. Oh, and try to talk from a quiet place. Turn down the TV. If you are out and about, do what you can, but nobody wants to listen to your shopping trip while asking you about your resume.

Get moral support Don’t ask people in the background to help you answer an interviewer’s questions. Odds are that the interviewer is not interested in hiring you and your friend. For that matter, if you need help answering questions on the phone, the interviewer will suspect you need help answering questions in real life. Like, say, at work.

Offer to stiff your boss. If you say you can take some extra time off for an interview, or that you can bring confidential materials from your current job, it is hardly a logical leap that you are willing to treat your next boss the same way.

You don’t need directions, you’ve got MapQuest! If the person on the other end of the phone offers directions, take them. Those internet mapping tools do not always know the best and easiest way to get someplace. On the other hand, the person you are talking to is sitting there, in the place you are going. He or she goes there every day, and knows how to get there and little details like “avoid such-and-such road because they are doing construction.” Go ahead and download a map in case you have a problem finding the place, but use the directions of someone who knows how to get there.

I hope this frees you to go that extra step and get that job interview… and give you the opportunity to embarrass yourself in person.

This week I received marketing materials from two competitors. Realtors, in fact.

One was a plastic bag, left by my front door while I was away. As paranoid as people are about terrorism, he should consider it a victory that I brought this bag inside at all as opposed to calling the local bomb squad. It contained a “complimentary luminary kit” (that’s a candle and a paper bag), a phone list for local ski lodges, and contact information. I do not know this realtor. I have never heard of him, and will likely never hear from him again. He has spent quite a bit of time and money putting these little bags out around the neighborhood. There is nothing in this bag that will remain in my home next week — except maybe the candle.

In short, I will not be calling this man, and I certainly won’t be generating a commission for him.

The other item was mailed to me by the realtor who helped me purchase the very house I sit in. It is a desk calendar. It is neutral in decor, nice and heavy, and has a little pocket in the front cover with 2 of his business cards. Not only is this item likely to sit on my desk all year — incidentally keeping his contact information handy — I am likely to give one of the business cards away to someone who needs a realtor. This might have cost more than a paper bag and a candle, but I think it’s better marketing.

Odds are very good that even if I don’t buy or sell a house in 2005, I will generate future revenue for this realtor.

It is almost impossible to run a successful business without some kind of marketing. When considering your marketing options, be sure to pay attention to the return on your investment.